dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
313
share rss forum feed


caseywor

join:2004-04-19
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Charter
·Mediacom

Can't let this go

How is this for unbiased?:


"Many AT&T users struggle to see 3 Mbps, so suggesting that 80-90% of U-Verse customers will qualify for these speeds is very unlikely. "


So, it is being implied that since "Many AT&T users struggle to see 3 Mbps" Uverse users would have trouble with said speeds. The problem with that kind of statement is that the users struggling to see 3Mbps speeds are on AT&T's DSL network and not Uverse. DSL users are connected to and are provisioned on DSLAMS that may be up to 15,000 ft. or so from the user's premises using older ADSL technology, whereas people who are Uverse users are provisioned on VRADS that are a much shorter distance from their premises using VDSL technology. This is a logical fallacy pure and simple, being used to put a negative spin on a technology that the writer doesn't like because AT&T chooses to use last mile copper. It is misleading to say that the speed limitations on DSL users would affect Uverse users, they are both subsets of AT&T users very much independent from one another.

etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
said by caseywor:

So, it is being implied that since "Many AT&T users struggle to see 3 Mbps" Uverse users would have trouble with said speeds. The problem with that kind of statement is that the users struggling to see 3Mbps speeds are on AT&T's DSL network and not Uverse. DSL users are connected to and are provisioned on DSLAMS that may be up to 15,000 ft. or so from the user's premises using older ADSL technology, whereas people who are Uverse users are provisioned on VRADS that are a much shorter distance from their premises using VDSL technology. This is a logical fallacy pure and simple, being used to put a negative spin on a technology that the writer doesn't like because AT&T chooses to use last mile copper. It is misleading to say that the speed limitations on DSL users would affect Uverse users, they are both subsets of AT&T users very much independent from one another.

Well since at&t decided to blur erase the line between the different technologies they use its their fault and they are the ones misleading the public. Uverse is not a technology, it is a brand that encompasses at least three different technologies ADSL2+, VDSL2 and FTTH. When you call and order 'uverse' at&t will give you one of the three flavors of uverse, mainly ADSL2+ or VDSL2.

When my Mother called at&t to order uverse she was told that fiber was going to be deployed directly to her computer but the best she could get was uverse 3Mbps so yes many the majority of uverse subscribers struggle to see 3 Mbps.

elefante72

join:2010-12-03
East Amherst, NY
reply to caseywor
You are correct. There are differences. The problem directly had my the rents in San Antonio (which went to TWC from U-verse) was that the neighborhood was older (40 year old house) and it only had 1 pair. When it would rain, ground loop issues abound, and they had att POTS. So he added u-verse (the VDSL version) and of course it was horrible and pings were through the roof. When it would rain, internet would go down-- surprise. And San Antonio has its spells... In any case AT&T did their tests and refused to send out a tech, so I told them just go to TWC, scrap TV, and do VOIP through Obi and GV. So $50 a month for the 15/3 (me thinks) and rock solid. Still a rip, but at least it is usable.

My point is it's both labor intensive and costly to run a pair (or single) back and AT&T is not that thrilled to do that. The refrigerator is a half-block away (maybe 100m), so one would think that good speed. Nope, it wasn't the VRAD it was the "last mile". And that is the killer...

I'm impressed that they have taken the technology this far, however it is FAR too inconsistent to be a stable universal service like FTTH or DOCSIS. Plain and simple, the physics are against DSL to keep up with tech that has more bandwidth. For 2013 a 15 Mbps can handle the typical family, but from 3-8PM what percentage of AT&T plant can do that versus cableco versus FIOS? Of course peering bs aside... What about 2014 and one wants to use cloud services and upstream, what then? They are loosing the race.


caseywor

join:2004-04-19
Orlando, FL
reply to etaadmin
Give some specific number and proof of this. If you are going to say most, give the numbers or a source.

Skippy25

join:2000-09-13
Hazelwood, MO
reply to etaadmin
Its funny you mention the fiber thing as I just had a co-worker tell me last week he is "upgrading" to uVerse 6mb and they are running fiber to his house. I told him "no they arent", after making fun of him for being a technology person and only having 3mb to begin with and only upgrading to 6. He insisted he was getting it because that is what the person told him on the phone.

Well..... today he came in as his install was yesterday and guess what? No fiber. The only thing that has changed is his modem/router and he gets 6 instead of 3 now. Which he could of gotten on his DSL connection.


Uverse_3mbps

@comcast.net

1 edit
reply to caseywor
You are wrong! AT&T manu (perhaps most) U-verse customers are also struggling to be able to maintain a 3mbps downstream connection.

Here is a snapshot of my U-verse modem stats that I just took; it just barely maintains its 3mbps downstream sync:




And quite often that 6dB downstream SN margin drops below the required minimum 6dB resulting in outages that you see in the DSLR line monitor screen shot shown below (this screen shot was also taken just a minute ago):




And I am sure that some will note that I am posting from an "@comcast.net" connection; that is because AT&T is only a backup connection (and not a very reliable backup...if someone else was not paying for it, I would not bother...a tethered cellphone is more reliable and faster).

etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
reply to caseywor
said by caseywor:

Give some specific number and proof of this. If you are going to say most, give the numbers or a source.

There are no numbers to backup anything, if you ask at&t they'll tell you that all of their uverse subs are fiber.

The facts are:
1. Today uverse growth is based on ADSL users being forced to go to uverse »DSL to U-Verse by force and many other threads, just google it.
2. Unlike real fiber to the prem or DOCSIS3 xDSL technologies are distance restricted. Customers further from the VRAD or IP-DSLAM will get slower service, there is no way around this limitation. So if somebody on 3Mbps ADSL switches to uverse ADSL2+ he/she will get 3 Mbps, period.

It depends on which uverse you are talking about.


caseywor

join:2004-04-19
Orlando, FL
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Charter
·Mediacom
OK...it appears to me they are abusing the term "fiber." I am talking about what I have considered to be the real Uverse, VDSL with a VRAD within a reasonable distance to support faster speeds, and TV service. To me, ADSL isn't something I would consider Uverse since it isn't the technology Uverse was introduced as.
Otherwise, I am aware of distance limitations, these types of limitations are universal in the world of RF communications.
I am not someone who is just jumping at the opportunity to defend AT&T, I just chose Charter over Uverse in my current home based on what I think is the best product. In this case, as many, I am a person who is always careful to parse the words of Karl.


88615298
Premium
join:2004-07-28
West Tenness
reply to caseywor
In my area all at&t offers now is "U-verse". However the max is 18 Mbps and not many can even qualify for that. Hell I live right in town and I can't get more than 12 Mbps. I know people that don't qualify higher than 768 kbps "U-verse". Ironically one of them had 3 Mbps when is was DSL, but somehow know after the addition of this FTTN their best speed they can get is 1/4 that? Good thing they moved on to Charter a while ago.

etaadmin

join:2002-01-17
Dallas, TX
kudos:1
reply to Uverse_3mbps
Exactly right, your line reminds me of my old at&t ADSL 6 Mbps. When uverse came to town all I could qualify was 3 Mbps for a BIG improvement of -3 Mbps.


AMDUSER
Premium
join:2003-05-28
Earth,
kudos:1
Reviews:
·AT&T U-Verse
·Time Warner Cable
reply to 88615298
Thats ok,... the best I can get is 6 Meg.. if they switched the line mode to VDSL2, I would be able to get upto 18 Meg or so. [Assuming the line card supported it..]

I live in metro Milwaukee.... trust me, there are lots of spare pairs in my neighborhood.


Chinookman
Premium
join:2008-09-29
Bay City, TX
reply to caseywor
well I gottah call BS on ATT I was happi to get 2/3 mbps w/dsl but no I let them talk me into the freaking uverse.....they can pack sand dry where the sun don't shine......we had the modem replaced 5 times within 6 weeks...I used a cat5 cable straight to the nic box no splices.......having house built 90 miles away talked to my niece and she has the same uverse issues with the blinking red light and having to reset daily........we are going to use dish w/internet service @10 mbps.....if I get half the promise it will beat uverse by x3..........and as soon and wife's contrct expires on her phone ATT will be minus one phone as well I screwed up and upgraded.......sigh.....uverse yeah right....their marketing needs to quit promising so much......